This study examines how the use of causal language in conveying relative performance feedback impacts subsequent task performance and affect. Studies on performance feedback and evaluation in accounting research have focused on the use of quantitative performance measures and the availability of relative performance information; few studies have examined whether the qualitative comments influence employee reactions to the reviews. Research in linguistics has shown that causal language, defined as language reflecting the search for reasons (commonly expressed through words such as “because” and “thus”), impacts how recipients process information that they have received. We posit that causal language clearly links explanations to relative performance feedback and in turn impacts subsequent task performance and affect by impacting how employees process the information. However, like much research on performance feedback, we predict that the effect of causal language in relative performance feedback depends on whether the feedback is positive or negative. Using a 2x2 between-subjects experiment, we find that greater use of causal language in delivering negative performance feedback leads to improved subsequent performance and affect; on the other hand, greater use of causal language in delivering positive feedback actually diminishes performance (while having no significant effect on affect). These seemingly contradictory results are explained by causal language’s role in facilitating employee sense-making after receiving relative performance feedback. Our results indicate that employees’ cognitive processes and reactions to performance feedback are influenced by the language used in explanations. Our study contributes to the call to greater research on the provision of performance feedback, which is considered an essential part of an organization’s management control systems.
{"title":"Because of 'Because': Examining the Use of Causal Language in Relative Performance Feedback","authors":"S. Loftus, Lloyd Tanlu","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2482799","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2482799","url":null,"abstract":"This study examines how the use of causal language in conveying relative performance feedback impacts subsequent task performance and affect. Studies on performance feedback and evaluation in accounting research have focused on the use of quantitative performance measures and the availability of relative performance information; few studies have examined whether the qualitative comments influence employee reactions to the reviews. Research in linguistics has shown that causal language, defined as language reflecting the search for reasons (commonly expressed through words such as “because” and “thus”), impacts how recipients process information that they have received. We posit that causal language clearly links explanations to relative performance feedback and in turn impacts subsequent task performance and affect by impacting how employees process the information. However, like much research on performance feedback, we predict that the effect of causal language in relative performance feedback depends on whether the feedback is positive or negative. Using a 2x2 between-subjects experiment, we find that greater use of causal language in delivering negative performance feedback leads to improved subsequent performance and affect; on the other hand, greater use of causal language in delivering positive feedback actually diminishes performance (while having no significant effect on affect). These seemingly contradictory results are explained by causal language’s role in facilitating employee sense-making after receiving relative performance feedback. Our results indicate that employees’ cognitive processes and reactions to performance feedback are influenced by the language used in explanations. Our study contributes to the call to greater research on the provision of performance feedback, which is considered an essential part of an organization’s management control systems.","PeriodicalId":325127,"journal":{"name":"AAA 2015 Management Accounting Section (MAS) Meeting (Archive)","volume":"56 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126649287","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Franchising is an important form of organizational control. Possible benefits of franchising include its ability to reduce agency costs that increase with costly monitoring, and provide incentives for the use of local information by onsite managers. However, these benefits may come at a cost, as franchisees may reduce quality by choosing to free ride. While many studies have investigated the reasons for franchising, few studies have documented the impacts of franchising on unit level operating performance. Using time-series data from a number of lodging properties that were converted to franchisee control from company control, this study documents the performance impacts of franchising. The analysis reveals that conversion results in a modest decline in financial performance and an immediate sharp decline in quality.
{"title":"An Empirical Analysis of Performance Impacts Resulting from Conversion to Franchise Operations","authors":"J. Hesford, Mina Pizzini, G. Potter","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2482838","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2482838","url":null,"abstract":"Franchising is an important form of organizational control. Possible benefits of franchising include its ability to reduce agency costs that increase with costly monitoring, and provide incentives for the use of local information by onsite managers. However, these benefits may come at a cost, as franchisees may reduce quality by choosing to free ride. While many studies have investigated the reasons for franchising, few studies have documented the impacts of franchising on unit level operating performance. Using time-series data from a number of lodging properties that were converted to franchisee control from company control, this study documents the performance impacts of franchising. The analysis reveals that conversion results in a modest decline in financial performance and an immediate sharp decline in quality.","PeriodicalId":325127,"journal":{"name":"AAA 2015 Management Accounting Section (MAS) Meeting (Archive)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125749177","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Ramji Balakrishnan, Haijin Lin, S. Sivaramakrishnan
Screening talent to appropriately assign tasks among agents is an important organizational decision. In this paper, we compare the efficacies of absolute and relative performance evaluation systems in identifying agent talent when information asymmetry is present. We identify conditions under which the firm prefers absolute performance evaluation. We also find that relative performance evaluation schemes are more susceptible to performance manipulation activities by agents. These findings support the use of absolute performance evaluation even though such a system discretizes available data by classifying agent output into "performance buckets" such as pass or fail. We discuss empirical implications.
{"title":"Task Assignment, Relative and Absolute Performance Evaluation","authors":"Ramji Balakrishnan, Haijin Lin, S. Sivaramakrishnan","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2482914","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2482914","url":null,"abstract":"Screening talent to appropriately assign tasks among agents is an important organizational decision. In this paper, we compare the efficacies of absolute and relative performance evaluation systems in identifying agent talent when information asymmetry is present. We identify conditions under which the firm prefers absolute performance evaluation. We also find that relative performance evaluation schemes are more susceptible to performance manipulation activities by agents. These findings support the use of absolute performance evaluation even though such a system discretizes available data by classifying agent output into \"performance buckets\" such as pass or fail. We discuss empirical implications.","PeriodicalId":325127,"journal":{"name":"AAA 2015 Management Accounting Section (MAS) Meeting (Archive)","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128484652","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：